On the Optimization Criteria Used in Two-View Motion Analysis

The three best-known criteria in two-view motion analysis are based, respectively, on the distances between points and their corresponding epipolar lines, on the gradient-weighted epipolar errors, and on the distances between points and the re-projections of their reconstructed points. The last one has a better statistical interpretation, but is significantly slower than the first two. The author shows that, given a reasonable initial guess of the epipolar geometry, the last two criteria are equivalent when the epipoles are at infinity, and differ from each other only a little even when the epipoles are in the image, as shown experimentally. The first two criteria are equivalent only when the epipoles are at infinity and when the observed object/scene has the same scale in the two images. This suggests that the second criterion is sufficient in practice because of its computational efficiency. Experiments with several thousand computer simulations and four sets of real data confirm the analysis.

[1]  Rachid Deriche,et al.  A Robust Technique for Matching two Uncalibrated Images Through the Recovery of the Unknown Epipolar Geometry , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Richard I. Hartley,et al.  In Defense of the Eight-Point Algorithm , 1997, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[3]  Gideon P. Stein,et al.  Lens distortion calibration using point correspondences , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[4]  Narendra Ahuja,et al.  Optimal motion and structure estimation , 1989, Proceedings CVPR '89: IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[5]  Rajiv Gupta,et al.  Stereo from uncalibrated cameras , 1992, Proceedings 1992 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[6]  Richard I. Hartley,et al.  Euclidean Reconstruction from Uncalibrated Views , 1993, Applications of Invariance in Computer Vision.

[7]  O. Faugeras Three-dimensional computer vision: a geometric viewpoint , 1993 .

[8]  H. C. Longuet-Higgins,et al.  A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two projections , 1981, Nature.

[9]  O. Faugeras Stratification of three-dimensional vision: projective, affine, and metric representations , 1995 .

[10]  Gang Xu,et al.  Epipolar Geometry in Stereo, Motion and Object Recognition , 1996, Computational Imaging and Vision.

[11]  Olivier D. Faugeras,et al.  What can be seen in three dimensions with an uncalibrated stereo rig , 1992, ECCV.

[12]  Thomas S. Huang,et al.  Motion and structure from feature correspondences: a review , 1994, Proc. IEEE.

[13]  Quang-Tuan Luong Matrice Fondamentale et Calibration Visuelle sur l''''Environnement - Vers une plus grande autonomie , 1992 .

[14]  Zhengyou Zhang,et al.  On the epipolar geometry between two images with lens distortion , 1996, Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Pattern Recognition.

[15]  Thomas S. Huang,et al.  Uniqueness and Estimation of Three-Dimensional Motion Parameters of Rigid Objects with Curved Surfaces , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[16]  Jake K. Aggarwal,et al.  On the computation of motion from sequences of images-A review , 1988, Proc. IEEE.

[17]  Gang Xu,et al.  A General Expression of the Fundamental Matrix for Both Perspective and Affine Cameras , 1997, IJCAI.